Report finds boatyard plan lacks services

Elizabeth Kim

Published 9:48 pm, Tuesday, February 5, 2013

STAMFORD -- A city-commissioned report evaluating Building and Land Technology's proposal to build a boatyard in Shippan has determined the facility will offer both significantly fewer and inferior services compared to the South End boatyard that was controversially dismantled by the developer last year.

For owners of sailboats and boats larger than 30 feet, which had accounted for the vast majority of storage customers in the South End, no on-land storage of any type will be available under the Shippan plan.

The highly anticipated comparison study was officially released by the city on Tuesday. Norman Cole, the land use bureau chief, said he wanted to make sure copies were first provided to members of the Zoning Board, which met on Monday night.

The 44-page report, written by New York design firm Bermello, Ajamil & Partners Architects, Inc., measured BLT's plan against the South End boatyard, formerly known as Yacht Haven Marina, as it existed in or about 1990. It marks the first step in a complicated land use process that will ultimately determine the fate of a prime piece of the South End waterfront.

Late last summer, BLT submitted plans to build a boatyard on a 3.5-acre site at 205 Magee Ave. following intense protests from boaters and a cease-and-desist order over its unauthorized closure and demolition of a South End boatyard that had been protected under city and state regulations.

The developer is hoping to redevelop the now-cleared boatyard site into a $750 million headquarters for hedge fund giant Bridgewater Associates. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has backed the project by agreeing to give Bridgewater as much as $115 million in state subsidies.

The city, which is yet to review the Bridgewater plan, has contended any new boatyard plan should be considered a replacement for the former Yacht Haven boatyard and provide the same range and amount of services that had existed before in Stamford.

The report judges BLT's plan against the former boatyard according to several categories, including the number of wet slips provided, summer and winter boat storage, the ability to accommodate sailboats and vessels over 30 feet in length, maintenance, navigation on the site and fuel services.

BLT's plan was shown as comparing poorly along every dimension.

In terms of slips, BLT will not have any to offer at 205 Magee Ave. and has not indicated how many will be reserved at the Bridgewater site. Yacht Haven, meanwhile, had 251 slips.

For winter storage, an often-cited priority among boaters, the Magee Avenue boatyard will be able to accommodate 292 boats. Yacht Haven had provided storage for 400 boats.

The area reserved for repairs at Magee Avenue will less than half than what existed at Yacht Haven; BLT has proposed a 22,000 square-foot building for indoor maintenance. Yacht Haven was cited as having a total of 48,000 square feet of combined indoor and outdoor space for maintenance.

In another widely attacked disparity, the 205 Magee Ave. boatyard will not offer any fuel service.

Yet among the findings, perhaps the most revealing was the conclusion that among the boats stored on land at Yacht Haven, 88 percent were boats longer than 30 feet and 81 percent were sailboats.

Because of the constrained size of the Shippan site and the use of rack storage, BLT will be unable to service boats in that category. The developer had initially maintained that large boat owners made up only a small fraction of the area's boating community.

As a result of the report, the Zoning Board on Monday night decided to postpone its review of the 205 Magee Ave. plan so as to give BLT time to respond.

In an email Tuesday, John Freeman, the attorney and spokesman for BLT, wrote that the company was glad the report had been completed.

"We have reviewed the report with our consultants. We are confident that we can respond to all of the comments in the report," he wrote. "Many of the comments ask for additional information or clarification and we will be meeting with staff to discuss these questions and our responses to all of the comments in the report. We look forward to working with the City to move the application forward."